alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Events - Appalachian Regional Commission

- West Virginia Entrepreneurship Ecosystem Conference The WV Entrepreneurship Ecosystem Conference is the state’s premier professional learning and networking opportunity for entrepreneurs, resource providers, and/or public, private, and government entities supporting entrepreneurs. The one-day event features compelling keynotes, engaging panels, hands-on workshops, and extensive networking opportunities for attendees. Who should attend? Don&#8217;t miss out on this incredible opportunity to be a [&#8230;]The post West Virginia Entrepreneurship Ecosystem Conference appeared first on Appalachian Regional Commission.
- Exploring Funding Opportunities with ARC The Pennsylvania Department of Community &#38; Economic Development and Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC) are partnering to host two workshops aimed at exploring ARC&#8217;s funding opportunities. These webinars are designed to give an overview of what ARC does, what its main goals are, and share high-level information on Non-Construction and Construction projects, with additional time devoted [&#8230;]The post Exploring Funding Opportunities with ARC appeared first on Appalachian Regional Commission.
- 2024 Professional Development Seminar The Development District Association of Appalachia (DDAA) invites you to take time to improve yourself and your organization at the 2024 Professional Development Seminar, in Huntington, WV. Whether you want to attain skills and knowledge for personal development or career advancement, join us for real-world executive and employee development sessions, networking and more in Huntington, [&#8230;]The post 2024 Professional Development Seminar appeared first on Appalachian Regional Commission.
- ARC 2024 Annual Conference Co-hosted by the State of Tennessee, ARC is excited to hold our annual conference,&#160;Advancing Appalachia, at the Chattanooga Convention Center in Chattanooga, Tennessee, on September 4-5, 2024. Our annual conference will highlight how our 13 states and 423 counties are working to advance Appalachia by building businesses and workforces, investing in infrastructure and tourism, and [&#8230;]The post ARC 2024 Annual Conference appeared first on Appalachian Regional Commission.
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

I,Martin J. Reid, certify that:

 

1.               I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form10-K of Ibis Technology Corporation;

 

2.               Based on my knowledge, this report does notcontain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a materialfact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;

 

3.               Based on my knowledge, the financialstatements, and other financial information included in this report, fairlypresent in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;

 

4.               The registrant’s other certifying officer(s)and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for theregistrant and have:

 

(a)Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

 

(b)Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectivenessof the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period coveredby this report based on such evaluation; and

 

(c)Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscalquarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annualreport) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materiallyaffect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

 

5.               The registrant’s other certifying officer(s)and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal controlover financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committeeof the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):

 

(a)All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and

 

(b)Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.

 
| Date: March 30, 2005                   |
|----------------------------------------|
|                                   |
|                                   |
| /s/ ***Martin J. Reid***               |   |
| Martin J. Reid                         |
| President and Chief  Executive Officer |

 

1

----
115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 425 

AN ACT 

To authorize the revocation or denial of passports to individuals affiliated with foreign terrorist organizations, and 

for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 425 EH

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘FTO Passport Revoca3 tion Act of 2017’’. 

4 SEC. 2. REVOCATION OR DENIAL OF PASSPORTS TO INDI5 VIDUALS AFFILIATED WITH FOREIGN TER6 RORIST ORGANIZATIONS. 

7 The Act entitled ‘‘An Act to regulate the issue and 

8 validity of passports, and for other purposes’’, approved 

9 July 3, 1926 (22 U.S.C. 211a et seq.), commonly known 

10 as the ‘‘Passport Act of 1926’’, is amended by adding at 

11 the end the following new section: 

12 ‘‘SEC. 4. AUTHORITY TO DENY OR REVOKE PASSPORT. 

13 ‘‘(a) INELIGIBILITY.— 

14 ‘‘(1) ISSUANCE.—Except as provided under 

15 subsection (b), the Secretary of State may refuse to 

16 issue a passport to any individual whom the Sec17 retary has determined has aided, assisted, abetted, 

18 or otherwise helped an organization the Secretary 

19 has designated as a foreign terrorist organization 

20 pursuant to section 219 of the Immigration and Na21 tionality Act (8 U.S.C. 1189). 

22 ‘‘(2) REVOCATION.—The Secretary of State 

23 may revoke a passport previously issued to any indi24 vidual described in paragraph (1). 

25 ‘‘(b) RIGHT OF REVIEW.—Any individual who, in ac26 cordance with this section, is denied issuance of a passport 
3 

•HR 425 EH

1 by the Secretary of State, or whose passport is revoked 

2 by the Secretary, may request a hearing before the Sec3 retary not later than 60 days after receiving notice of such 

4 denial or revocation. 

5 ‘‘(c) REPORT.— 

6 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—If the Secretary of State 

7 refuses to issue or revokes a passport pursuant to 

8 subsection (a), or if, subsequent to a hearing pursu9 ant to subsection (b), the Secretary issues or cancels 

10 a revocation of a passport that was the subject of 

11 such a hearing, the Secretary shall, not later than 

12 30 days after such refusal or revocation, or such 

13 issuance or cancellation, submit to the Committee on 

14 Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives and 

15 the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate 

16 a report on such refusal, revocation, issuance, or 

17 cancellation, as the case may be. 

18 ‘‘(2) FORM.—The report submitted under para19 graph (1) may be submitted in classified or unclassi20 fied form. 
4 

•HR 425 EH

1 ‘‘(d) DEFINITION.—In this section, the term ‘pass2 port’ includes a passport card.’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives November 1, 

2017. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 425 

AN ACT 

To authorize the revocation or denial of passports 

ganizations, and for other purposes. to individuals affiliated with foreign terrorist or-
##### 



Exhibit 31.2 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES -OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, Robert W. Peshek, certify that:  1.
    
    I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended
September 30, 2004 of Belden & Blake Corporation;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement
of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this
report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of
the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as
defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)), for the registrant
and have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our
supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the
registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to
us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in
which this report is being prepared; (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure
controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions
about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as
of the end of the period covered by this report based on such
evaluation; and (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants
most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in
the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal
control over financial reporting; and  5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on
our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,
to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants
board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the
design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which
are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to
record, process, summarize and report financial information; and (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the registrants
internal control over financial reporting. Date: November 12, 2004
    
    /s/ Robert W. PeshekRobert W. Peshek, Senior Vice Presidentand Chief Financial Officer
 27
ex10a.htm


 






 












Exhibit (10)(a)

















Consent of Ernst & Young LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm












We consent to the reference to our firm under the caption “Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” in Post-Effective Amendment No. 66 to the 1933 Act Registration Statement (Form N-4 No. 333-40937) and Amendment No. 542 to the 1940 Act Registration Statement (Form N-4 No. 811-08517), and to the use therein of our reports dated (a) March 31, 2016, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of The Lincoln National Life Insurance Company and (b) April 12, 2016, with respect to the financial statements of Lincoln Life Variable Annuity Account N for the interests in a separate account under individual flexible payment deferred variable annuity contracts.








/s/ Ernst &  Young LLP




Philadelphia, Pennsylvania




December 27, 2016
**UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** NATIONAL VEHICLE AND FUEL EMISSIONS LABORATORY

2565 PLYMOUTH ROAD ANN ARBOR, MICHIGAN 48105 - 2498
**MEMORANDUM** SUBJECT: Air Quality

Modeling Output s for the Proposed Tier 3 Motor Vehicle Emission and Fuel Standards FROM: Margaret Zawacki

Assessment and Standards Division Office of T ransportation and Air Quality TO: Docket EPA - HQ - OAR - 20 1 1 - 0 135 - DRAFT - #### DATE: March 22 , 201 3 The purpose of this memorandum is to transmit data files which were used in the air quality modeling analy ses for the proposed Tier 3 Motor Vehicle Emission and Fuel Standards . The air quality modeling analy ses are discussed in Section I I I. C of the preamble, Section 7.2.2

– Section 7.2.4 of the Regulatory

Impact Analy sis (RIA) and in the Air Quality Modeling Technical Support Document . In formation on the air quality modeling inventories is discussed in Section 7.2.1 of the RIA. Following is a list of the information contain ed on the enclosed disc :

- deposition DBF files folder: gridded annual nitrogen and sulfur deposition difference data for 2017 and 2030 referen ce cases and Tier 3 control scenario s

- toxics DBF files folder: gridded annual and seasonal (winter/summer) toxics difference data for 2017 and 2030 reference cases and Tier 3 control scenario s

- TIER 3 _Proposal_O zone_DVs .xls x : county- level 8 - hour max ozone Design Value projections for 2017 and 2030 reference cases and Tier 3 control scenario s

- TIER3

_Propsoal_ annual PM_DVs.xls x : county- level annual PM2.5 Design Value projections for 2017 and 2030 reference cases and Tier 3 c ontrol scenario s

- TIER 3

_Proposal_ daily

PM_dv s.xls x : county- level 24 - hour PM2.5 Design Value projections for 2017 and 2030 reference cases and Tier 3 control scenario s OFFICE OF AIR AND RADIATION- TIER 3 _Proposal_Visibility .xls x : Class 1 Area visibility projections for the 20% wor st day s for 2005 reference case , 2030 reference case and Tier 3 control scenario s

- CMAQv4.7.1_Release Notes.doc: RELEASE_NOTES for CMAQv4.7.1 from ORD, Shawn Roselle

- met.2005.12EUS1.pdf: Baker K. and P. Dolwick. Meteorological Modeling Performance Evaluation for the Annual 2005 Eastern U.S. 12 - km Domain Simulation, USEPA/OAQPS, February 2, 2009.

- met.2005.12WUS1.pdf: Baker K. and P. Dolwick. Meteorological Mode ling Performance Evaluation for the Annual 2005 Western U.S. 12 - km Domain Simulation, USEPA/OAQPS, February 2, 2009.

- met.2005.36US1.pdf: Baker K. and P. Dolwick. Meteorological Modeling Performance Evaluation for the Annual 2005 Continental U.S. 36 - km Domain Simulation, USEPA/OAQPS, February 2, 2009.

- 2009 aqchem_update.pdf: Roselle, S. and Carlton, A. Updates to the CMAQ aqueous chemistry routine (aqchem). August 5, 2009. Attachments
# C_2010179EN.01000502.xml

| 3.7.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 179/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.7.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 179/5

---

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 20 May 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Austria)) — Agrana Zucker GmbH v Bundesminister für Land- und Forstwirtschaft, Umwelt und Wasserwirtschaft

(Case C-365/08) (1)

(Sugar - Regulation (EC) No 318/2006 - Article 16 - Calculation of the production charge - Inclusion of the quantity of quota sugar withdrawn from the market in the basis for assessment of the charge - Principles of proportionality and non-discrimination)

(2010/C 179/07)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Verwaltungsgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Agrana Zucker GmbH

Defendant: Bundesminister für Land- und Forstwirtschaft, Umwelt und Wasserwirtschaft

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Austria) — Interpretation of Article 34 of the EC Treaty, especially the principles of non-discrimination, the protection of legitimate expectations and proportionality — Interpretation and validity of Article 16 of Council Regulation (EC) No 318/2006 of 20 February 2006 on the common organisation of the markets in the sugar sector (OJ 2006 L 58, p. 1) — Inclusion, for the purposes of calculating the production charge, of the quota subject to preventive withdrawal in accordance with Article 1 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 290/2007 of 16 March 2007 establishing, for the 2007/2008 marketing year, the percentage provided for in Article 19 of Regulation (EC) No 318/2006 (OJ 2007 L 78, p. 20)

Operative part of the judgment

| 1. | Article 16 of Council Regulation (EC) No 318/2006 of 20 February 2006 on the common organisation of the markets in the sugar sector must be interpreted as meaning that the quantity of quota sugar withdrawn from the market pursuant to Article 19 of that regulation and Article 1 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 290/2007 of 16 March 2007 establishing, for the 2007/2008 marketing year, the percentage provided for in Article 19 of Regulation (EC) No 318/2006 is included in the basis for assessment of the production charge. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Article 16 of Council Regulation (EC) No 318/2006 of 20 February 2006 on the common organisation of the markets in the sugar sector must be interpreted as meaning that the quantity of quota sugar withdrawn from the market pursuant to Article 19 of that regulation and Article 1 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 290/2007 of 16 March 2007 establishing, for the 2007/2008 marketing year, the percentage provided for in Article 19 of Regulation (EC) No 318/2006 is included in the basis for assessment of the production charge.

| 2. | Examination of the second question has not revealed anything which might affect the validity of Article 16 of Regulation No 318/2006. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Examination of the second question has not revealed anything which might affect the validity of Article 16 of Regulation No 318/2006.

---

(1)  OJ C 285, 8.11.2008.

---
# C_2020304EN.01000201.xml

| 14.9.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 304/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.9.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 304/2

---

Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 26 February 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Arbitral Tributário (Centro de Arbitragem Administrativa — CAAD) — Portugal) — PAGE International Lda v Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira

(Case C-630/19) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Taxation - Value added tax (VAT) - Deduction of input tax - Directive 2006/112/EC - Articles 168 and 176 - Exclusion from the right to deduct - Acquisition of food services - Standstill clause - Accession to the European Union)

(2020/C 304/02)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Tribunal Arbitral Tributário (Centro de Arbitragem Administrativa — CAAD)

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: PAGE International Lda

Defendant: Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira

Operative part of the order

Article 168(a) and Article 176 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation which, after the accession of the Member State concerned to the European Union, reduces the scope of expenditure excluded from the right to deduct value added tax by authorising, under certain conditions, partial deduction of value added tax on such expenses, including inter alia those relating to food, even where the taxable person asserts that those expenses were entirely assigned to the exercise of his or her taxable economic activity.

---

(1)  OJ C 389, 11.11.2019.

---
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-6993

JOEY D. SMALLS,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; CHARLES CONDON,

Attorney General of the State of South

Carolina,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Anderson. Cameron M. Currie, District Judge.

(CA-02-2212-8-22)

Submitted: December 3, 2003 Decided: January 9, 2004

 

Before TRAXLER and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Joey D. Smalls, Appellant Pro Se. William Edgar Salter, III,

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Columbia, South

Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Joey D. Smalls, a state prisoner, seeks to appeal the

district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under

28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). The order is not appealable unless a

circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28

U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will

not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a

constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner

satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists

would find that his constitutional claims are debatable and that

any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also

debatable or wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336

(2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee,

252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed

the record and conclude that Smalls has not made the requisite

showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and

dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the

facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the

materials before the court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

DISMISSED
**Exhibit 32.1**

**Certificationof the Principal Executive Officer**

**Pursuant to 18 U.S. C. Section 1350**

Inconnection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Kaiser Group Holdings, Inc.(the “Company”) for the period ending December 31, 2006 as filed with the Securitiesand Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Douglas W.McMinn, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, to the best of myknowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that:

(1)  The Reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

(2)  Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| March 30, 2007 |   | /s/ DOUGLAS W.  MCMINN                |
|----------------|--------|---------------------------------------|
|           |   | Douglas W. McMinn,                    |
|           |   | President and Chief Executive Officer |

 

----
# C_2009069EN.01003203.xml

| 21.3.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 69/32 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.3.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 69/32

---

Order of the President of the Sixth Chamber of the Court of 18 December 2008 — Commission of the European Communities v Republic of Poland

(Case C-142/08) (1)

1

(2009/C 69/69)

Language of the case: Polish

Language of the case: Polish

The President of the Sixth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 142, 7.6.2008.

1

---